---The Final Forge period has concluded for The Hive Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Beta Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready for BETA Play. After an extended period of time in BETA and once all quirks and issues have been resolved, the map will be put into Full Play(barring any Lack vetoes).

---The Hive Map has reached the ‘Final Forge’ Stage. The map has passed rigorous gameplay and graphics examinations, and major concerns have been addressed. If you have any other concerns, please make your voice heard. If after a reasonable amount of time there has not been any objection or protest, the map will be deemed finished with the 'Foundry Brand' of approval and will be submitted for live play. As long as there is still discussion or posts that have yet to be commented on, the map will remain in Final Forge until said discussion has reached the conclusion that the map has reached its final and polished version.

---The Beta period has concluded for The Hive Map. All objections have had their time. The Foundry and I hereby brand this map with the Foundry Brand. Let it be known that this map is now ready to be released into live play.

Congratulations WidowMakers and killerpit4e, your shiny new medals are well-earned

Conquer Club, enjoy!

--MrBenn

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Updates:1) Added Evil DIMwits sig. he has been helping out Killer with XML. ThanksOnce XML is done, we can post 88's and check connections.

thenobodies80 wrote:I see no problems with this map and there is a good support, it's time to go on and refine gameplay.I am pleased to issue this map the draft stamp on behalf of the foundry community

Many people thought that this was the total number of armies a player could get per turn. That is not the case. It is the total number of armies a player can get for holding individual territories. Right now CC give a player 1 army for 3 territories. So 12=4armies, 21=7 armies, etc. This map (right now) would be capped at 10. SO no matter how many armies you had above 30, a player still only gets 10. But they can get more for holding bonus regions.

3) Hex bonus values - Still up for discussion4) Border darkness - Still up for discussion

I did mess around with this a bit before posting initially. I don't know how much darker they can get but we can look into it.

5) General color scheme- Still up for discussion

I chose the pastel colors because they are easy on teh eye and are not the same as teh army number colors.

6) Legend text and wording - Still up for discussion7) Nodes- Still up for discussion

Some people liked these, other did not. We could just make the nodes, the QUEEN BEES, They start neutral and maybe get +2 autodeploy. That is not too far off from a standard map. But we all can talk about it as we progress.

Stay tuned for a new map V3 and then we can get back into the nit picking of specifics.

But since items 2,3,5,6,7 can be discussed before the next draft, please feel free to talk about them.

3 Hex bonus group has 1 border and at least 2 neighbors6 Hex bonus group has 2 border and at least 2 neighbors9 Hex bonus group has 3 border and at least 3 neighbors12 Hex bonus group has 4 border and at least 4 neighbors15 Hex bonus group has 5 border and at least 5 neighbors

[u]

Last edited by killerpit4e on Sat Sep 19, 2009 7:02 pm, edited 3 times in total.

I think the dark impassables should be made darker as I personally am having a hard time picking them out.Also the node borders should be explained more. DO they only connect to other nodes or normal terrs as well?

There are borders? So yeah they need to be more visible. Looks pretty cool though — little confused on how the naming works if it's just A1-7 every time?

.44

Yes there are borders. Right now there are only a few connections between hex groups. In the top left you can see how the dark lines are gone and a very faint white line is there. i still need to go and remove the dark lines between hexes to connect groups (I have already removed the internal connections for the color groups themselves)

As far as naming, I did not want to spend a bunch more time renaming all the terts if this map was not desired by anyone. If the map has legs and people want it, i will take the time to adjust the letters. 19 rows and 20 columns.

cena-rules wrote:I think the dark impassables should be made darker as I personally am having a hard time picking them out.Also the node borders should be explained more. DO they only connect to other nodes or normal terrs as well?

The nodes border the specific ones listed per node and will border the surrounding hex groups once I remove the dark impassable borders and connect them.

There are borders? So yeah they need to be more visible. Looks pretty cool though — little confused on how the naming works if it's just A1-7 every time?

.44

Yes there are borders. Right now there are only a few connections between hex groups. In the top left you can see how the dark lines are gone and a very faint white line is there. i still need to go and remove the dark lines between hexes to connect groups (I have already removed the internal connections for the color groups themselves)

As far as naming, I did not want to spend a bunch more time renaming all the terts if this map was not desired by anyone. If the map has legs and people want it, i will take the time to adjust the letters. 19 rows and 20 columns.

WM

I meant the intra-hex group borders, but yeah that you removed em makes sense…

I like it — there's a void of really large maps and this looks like a good way to do it.

whitestazn88 wrote:what? i don't understand the territ names... but cool

WidowMakers wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:

kylegraves1 wrote:i cant tell on the boarders

There are borders? So yeah they need to be more visible. Looks pretty cool though — little confused on how the naming works if it's just A1-7 every time?

.44

Yes there are borders. Right now there are only a few connections between hex groups. In the top left you can see how the dark lines are gone and a very faint white line is there. i still need to go and remove the dark lines between hexes to connect groups (I have already removed the internal connections for the color groups themselves)As far as naming, I did not want to spend a bunch more time renaming all the terts if this map was not desired by anyone. If the map has legs and people want it, i will take the time to adjust the letters. 19 rows and 20 columns.

whitestazn88 wrote:what? i don't understand the territ names... but cool

WidowMakers wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:

kylegraves1 wrote:i cant tell on the boarders

There are borders? So yeah they need to be more visible. Looks pretty cool though — little confused on how the naming works if it's just A1-7 every time?

.44

Yes there are borders. Right now there are only a few connections between hex groups. In the top left you can see how the dark lines are gone and a very faint white line is there. i still need to go and remove the dark lines between hexes to connect groups (I have already removed the internal connections for the color groups themselves)As far as naming, I did not want to spend a bunch more time renaming all the terts if this map was not desired by anyone. If the map has legs and people want it, i will take the time to adjust the letters. 19 rows and 20 columns.

WM

my bad man... i opened the thread for a while before i posted, and i missed those posts in my haste

WM, as one who has already created a hex style map (which was voted for by the punters), i give you my support to forge ahead with your latest creation here. I have always beleived that hex style would have a good part to play in CC, now that punters are possibly more-open to this style (since Actium). But i also ask the foundry to consider that in creation of this map perhaps we can no longer deny other creations such as the beehive, yes???

cairnswk wrote:WM, as one who has already created a hex style map (which was voted for by the punters), i give you my support to forge ahead with your latest creation here. I have always beleived that hex style would have a good part to play in CC, now that punters are possibly more-open to this style (since Actium). But i also ask the foundry to consider that in creation of this map perhaps we can no longer deny other creations such as the beehive, yes???

Thanks cairns. I was not sure if other people would like this map. It does not have much in the way of artistic taste. It is very exact and efficient, not much flair or style (unless that is a style).

I guess the engineer in me wanted to make another map to cram as much as I can into this map and see how BIG I can make it map (Maze Craze is the other).

The cool thing about this one is that it is a hex but it is not just a hex. By having the borders (an not just letting everyoen attack all 6 neighbors) the map will have a large feel but still be sectioned off well. It will look like a tight map but the GP will be setup (hopefully) to give more of a World 3.1 feel. We shall see.

The one thing this map does not have is a theme. Unless HUGE map with as many territories is a theme. lol

SO I guess my main question is:Does anyone think this map should/shouldn't be done and why?

If you think it is dumb or has GP issues or looks stupid or whatever, please let me know. If there is a favorable response then i will get to work on the tert names and the borders. Then we can start talking some more.

I'm sorry, but to me this board looks boring... It doesn't seem to offer much in either aethetics or gameplay.I guess the questions come to mind, is there a need, or demand for this style of map? Will it fare any better Actium in numbers of games played?Are you creating something unique - or merely putting a tilt on something that's already been spun?

Wait, can we actually still asnwer that around here? I thought that after the recent tongue lashing some of us took we were only supposed to say nice things about each others' maps. But hey, since you asked...

WidowMakers wrote:If you think it is dumb or has GP issues or looks stupid or whatever, please let me know. If there is a favorable response then i will get to work on the tert names and the borders.

When I first saw this I failed to notice that your name is on it, WM. So my gut reaction was "great, somebody else is trying to squeeze as many territories as possible into the 630x600 pixel limitation, regardless of whether or not it looks like anything." So I was a little surprised to look through the thread and see your involvement - usually you are a little more particular about the work you present.

Do I think it is dumb or looks stupid: well, yes and yes. It's a dumb idea and it looks stupid. I mean come on, it's a field of hexagons. Why not a field of triangles? Or squares? In fact, why have any shapes whatsoever? Let's just put 200 army shadows out there and connect them with lines. In fact, we could usher in a whole new realm of map development here at CC - we'll call it one hour mapmaking. Stick a bunch of army circles against a white background, call it Uber Monster Mega Awesome Map, and you're done. It sure would make the Foundry process easier - no more pesky graphics requirements to have to meet.

Does it have GP issues... well, probably, but they could be worked out. Honestly there's nothing about this map that makes me care enough to figure out what those gameplay issues are. Is that little region equal to this little region, does node 1 have as many borders as node 3... I don't really care.

This map is, in my opinion, not a map. It's a hexagonal grid. If this grid were laid over a battlefield of some kind I could get behind it. Actium did it, and I know WM could do it if he put his mind to it.

As it is, it will have plenty of support because folks want a bigger map. And people will play it because it is a bigger map. So regardless of what I say - or what mibi is sure to say when he sees it - this map could be made with the "Simple GFX" that are mentioned in the first post. But it's not something I would ever want to put my name on, and it would further erode the pretty high standards we've had around here for the past three years.

oaktown wrote:When I first saw this I failed to notice that your name is on it, WM. So my gut reaction was "great, somebody else is trying to squeeze as many territories as possible into the 630x600 pixel limitation, regardless of whether or not it looks like anything." So I was a little surprised to look through the thread and see your involvement - usually you are a little more particular about the work you present.

Thanks for being honest here oak. I appreciate it.

oaktown wrote:Do I think it is dumb or looks stupid: well, yes and yes. It's a dumb idea and it looks stupid. I mean come on, it's a field of hexagons. Why not a field of triangles? Or squares? In fact, why have any shapes whatsoever? Let's just put 200 army shadows out there and connect them with lines. In fact, we could usher in a whole new realm of map development here at CC - we'll call it one hour mapmaking. Stick a bunch of army circles against a white background, call it Uber Monster Mega Awesome Map, and you're done. It sure would make the Foundry process easier - no more pesky graphics requirements to have to meet.

First off I will comment on the triangles, squares and no shapes whatsoever. Hexagons are used because they have 6 sides and that allows for more border options that triangles, or squares and it is a repeatable pattern as well. Plus the 888 fit inside very well along with the name. So the Hexes were picked for purely the layout and max amount of territories while allowing for the most border possibilities.

Well the one hour map making is not really accurate either. I had to do quite a bit of math and initial layout to figure the best and max number I could get in here. Plus to eliminate the need for bonus naming and legend size (which robs the map of territory space) I had to figure out a good way to give bonuses but not name them on the actual map. By having 3,6,9,12,and 15 hex groups, the GP allows for a wide variety and number of bonus groups and the nodes were added to bring the 380 (19x20) number down to 345 so it would be divisible by 3 and this allow for teh hex groups. Plus the node allow for fast movement around the map.

oaktown wrote:Does it have GP issues... well, probably, but they could be worked out. Honestly there's nothing about this map that makes me care enough to figure out what those game play issues are. Is that little region equal to this little region, does node 1 have as many borders as node 3... I don't really care.

I am sure there are GP issues and I am sure they could get worked out. I decided to start this map for a couple reasons.

1) GP is the same whether I have a 5000x5000 fictional map or a 630x600 hex map. This small version allows for 350 territories that would not be possible any other way2) People have asked for larger maps3) A map that was easy to understand and had basic game play with TONS of territories would work great for a Battle Royale (but not only for that)

oaktown wrote:This map is, in my opinion, not a map. It's a hexagonal grid. If this grid were laid over a battlefield of some kind I could get behind it. Actium did it, and I know WM could do it if he put his mind to it.

Yes it is a grid. And yes I could put some background behind it. But if I did that I would lose 200+ territories and it would become a completely different animal.

oaktown wrote:As it is, it will have plenty of support because folks want a bigger map. And people will play it because it is a bigger map. So regardless of what I say - or what mibi is sure to say when he sees it - this map could be made with the "Simple GFX" that are mentioned in the first post. But it's not something I would ever want to put my name on, and it would further erode the pretty high standards we've had around here for the past three years.

Once again I appreciate teh post. I actually agree with most things you say.

There really is no theme, it is very simple and some people might not think it is a map.But the only way to make a map with 350 territories that are all playable with 888 and bonuses and standard GP (not just a group like the yard in Prison Riot) this is the only way.Whether I do it or player ABC does it, if we want a GP option with this many territories at these current sizes, this is thhe only way.

However, like I said before, I will take suggestions and all of the remarks into account. If the people want a big map with no theme, then I will do it if no one else will. If people don't, then I won't.

Plus oak, I have tons more ideas that I can exercise my right brain. But this map is for my "engineering , math based, be as efficient as I can and pack as much stuff into a small space technical left brain". lol

Please others, I would like more opinions. ThanksWM

P.S.. Conquerman was actually easier to do than this. Based on the time involved and the actual GP mechanics, that is the simplest (Graphically) map I did. Only thing saving it is that it has a theme.

Elijah S wrote:I'm sorry, but to me this board looks boring... It doesn't seem to offer much in either aethetics or gameplay.I guess the questions come to mind, is there a need, or demand for this style of map? Will it fare any better Actium in numbers of games played?Are you creating something unique - or merely putting a tilt on something that's already been spun?

In looking at the Actium number of plays, 5482 games have been played in one year & 9 1/2 months. -Which isn't a relatively large number of plays. -It breaks down into about 12.5 games per day.So I have to question whether or not there's truly that big a demand for a map of this kind.That being said - the other 2 maps that come to mind having considerably more territories than most, are Peloponesia and Waterloo, and both of those have fared quite a bit better.So maybe there is a reasonable, but not huge demand for this map style... but, I think that going too basic with the graphics will result in less plays.

In agreement with Oaktown - and seeing the imaginative and graphic ability in your other projects - looking at this map seems like "how can I get that many territories in that small a space?"Perhaps having fewer territories for the sake of adding some visual appeal would be a worthwhile consideration?

The reason I don't play the actium map is that it's confusing. All the territories get confused because of the map behind and the garrish colors. This appears simple with simple rules and very straight forward gameplay along with the bonus of having the huge number of territories, which I haven't seen before. That's why I like this map idea. We currently have no map like this and even if the map is only played 12 games a day, is it a problem with server space? This forum takes up as much space on the server as a map does. Do the maps have to be an exclusive club? I thought this site was to allow everyone the ability to play against others members, and a big part of that is having new maps with different gameplay that make it much more interesting. I believe this map to be unique enough to get in. I think we're all stuck in the rut that all maps should be like the original risk map, and because of this we have 80-90% of all the maps being between 40 and 50 territories. People are scared of many territory maps. I personally think they give the best gameplay. My favorite map is World 2.1 which has 112 territories, and I play it not because it has a good view of the world, or because its a map, but because having a ton of territories and bonus areas, which this map has even more of. I think we should all get off our high rockers and start approving more maps. The only reason to not have that many maps is because its hard to find a map you want, which I am working on organizing the maps and creating a tool so you can search for maps by size, bonus type and other features. This will help everyone to realize that many maps that get tossed could have worked and been enjoyed, but people are afraid of change, no matter what it is, and that's why so many good ideas get shot down. There is plenty of server space available in the world. I mean, we keep a record of every game that's ever been played. That surely takes more space. Anyway, sorry about the rant, its just something I feel strongly about.